The Relationship Between The Customer Value And Satisfaction To Advocacy Behavior : The Empirical Study In Higher Education.

(1)

RESEARCH ARTICLE

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CUSTOMER VALUE AND

SATISFACTION TO ADVOCACY BEHAVIOR : THE EMPIRICAL

STUDY IN HIGHER EDUCATION

1_{Nurdin Hidayah*,}2_{Diana Sari and}3_{Arief Helmi}

1_{Lecturer, Department of Tourism, Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Bandung, West Java, INDONESIA.} 2,3_{Lecturer, Department of Economy and Business, Universitas Padjadjaran, West Java, INDONESIA.}

*Corresponding Author : nurdin@stp-bandung.ac.id

ABSTRACT

This paper is an empirical study that presents a comprehensive framework of relationships among customer value, customer satisfaction and customer advocacy behavior in the higher education industry. While previous studies reveal customer satisfaction lead to customer advocacy behavior, this study shows dissimilar result. The samples were collected from the final level students. A total of 150 respondents participated in this study. The results indicated that customer value is a crucial role in the higher education. The study finds that customer satisfaction is statistically not significant to customer advocacy behavior. It maybe because customers search more than a satisfaction, they search for delight on higher education. It suggests that higher customer advocacy behavior arises when higher education delivers superior customer value and maintenance the customer’s delight.

Keywords : Customer Value, Satisfaction, Customer Advocacy, Higher Education.

1. INTRODUCTION

In today’s business situation, companies face challenges and competition. Not only in purely profit oriented business, but also in the industry such as higher education. They have a lot of competition from other schools.

The task of the marketer is to create a perception that the brand chosen by consumers as compared with competitors or in another sense, consumer perceptions of a brand will affect the preference for brands that appeared before him and consumer would prefer brands that match the criteria they want.

Therefore, consumer loyalty to the brand is very important to win the competition. According to Marshall Goldsmith, Founding Director of the Financial Times Knowledge Dialogue and the Alliance for Strategic Leadership in Smith and Wheeler (2005), managing the customer experience is an incredibly practical guide for building customer loyalty in the new century. This means that, managing the customer experience is a practical way to build customer loyalty to the brand of a company or any bid.

The end result of designing customer loyalty into a business model is about building a brand and creating brand advocates for that. The customer's experience is the ultimate builder of a brand and the ultimate drivers of brand loyalty (Smith and Wheeler, 2005:43). This implies that managing the customer's experience is a way to build brand loyalty that will not only achieve repeat customers' but also reaching as far back as brand advocates.

Revenue growth has everything to do with "advocacy," the readiness of customers to prefer a supplier and then refer

friends, relatives, and col-leagues. Advocacy is genuine, deeply felt, loyalty. The dictionary definition of "advocate" is "plead for, defend, champion, recommend, support." This is much more than customers who come back again and again. Advocates are people who are prepared to argue your case. They are willing to offer their support as well as their business (Smith and Wheeler, 2005:43).

Customer loyalty means that consumers not only buy back (repeat customers) but as besides buying continuously, they also willingly became an agent for the offer brand to others so that the growth of corporate profits will be achieved by itself.

Advocacy builds trust. Trust is more than just a self-congratulatory adjective to be appended to a company's press releases. Trust means advocating for the customer's long term interests. Trust is hard to earn and easy-to lose-but if your company earns the trust, it will enjoy sustained benefits. Trust increases customer loyalty because satisfied customers buy repeatedly, purchase a wider variety of products, and recruit their friends up to become customers. This can mean profitable growth (Urban, 2005:15).

The statement implies that by applying the concept of Customer Advocacy Behaviors, the organization will receive the trust of customers, and if the customer has to give credence to the product or brand they will be loyal and if the customer is loyal, the customer will buy again, buy a number of Larger and help recruit new customers or in other words, loyalty will impact profitability growth. Customer advocacy behavior is the customer post purchase behavior. While some researchers such as Yuningsih, 2005;

(2)

Roostika & Muthaly, 2010, as well as Anwar and Gulzhar, 2011, has proven that customer behavior is influenced by customer value and customer satisfaction, research on the behavior of these new customers to discuss some indicators that customer loyalty and referrals repurchase intention, not to delve further into the behavior of customer advocacy. Research on customer behavior above show the importance of the organization to satisfy their customer in order to achieve loyalty, while satisfying customers is not enough, but also should be better than the competition or known to have superior customer value. To achieve superior customer value, according to Cravens & Piercy (2009:13) organization must have market oriented, namely customer

focus, competitor intelligence and cross function

coordination in other words, the organization must understand the market with a focus on customers, competitors and the coordination of internal business functions.

Understanding the market, especially to understand the customer behavior is very important to higher education sector, because by understanding the market, it will be easier to know the value that is expected by the students and ultimately satisfying and simultaneously foster the students’ the advocacy behavior.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Customer Value : Values are widely accepted as critical factors in the long term success of an educational institution that aim at attracting and retaining students (Phadke and Bhagwat, 2011). It can be interpreted that the value is the most important factor determining the success or long-term educational institutions in gaining and maintaining students. The concept of customer value today is in great demand by practitioners/managers and academics especially those that work in the areas of business, especially the marketing function.

(Parasuraman, 1997; Muthaly & Roostika, 2010). Kotler and Keller (2012); Cravens and Piercy (2009); AMA (American Marketing Association) (2006); also Duchessi (2002:1) reveals the importance of understanding customer value in marketing and business success. This is because the value of the customer is a basic element in business success (Graf & Maas, 2008:2) and delivering superior customer value than competitors is very important in winning the competition (Muthaly & Roostika, 2010). Organizations that focus on customer value will have a sustainable competitive advantage (Woodruff, 1997). Graf & Maas, (2008:6) have summarized some understanding of the customer value derived from several experts outlined in the following table:

Table 1 : Understanding Customer Value

Woodruff (1997)

Customer Value is a “customer’s perceived preference for and evaluation of those products attributes, attribute performance, and consequences arising from use that facilitate (or block) achieving the customer’s

goals and purposes in use situations.” Holbrook

(1994)

Customer Value is “a relativistic (comparative, personal, situational) preference characterizing a subject’s [consumer’s] experience of interacting with some object … i.e., any good, service, person, place, thing, event,

or idea.”

Gale (1994) “Customer Value is market perceived quality adjusted for the relative price of your product. [It is] your

customer’s opinion of your products (or services) as compared to that of your competitors.” Zeithaml

(1988)

“Perceived value is a customer’s overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and what is given.”

Source : Graf & Maas (2008:6)

Customer Value in Higher Education: According to McDougall and Levesque (2000); Szymanski and Henard (2001) on Phadke and Bhagwat (2011) customer value in higher education is the students‘overall assessment of the utility of an educational institution based on perceptions of what is received (benefit) and what is given (costs). May mean that the value of the customer in higher education is the assessment of the students' perceptions about what is gained and what is sacrificed to an educational institution. Customer value dimensions according to Duchessi (2002:85) are quality of goods, services and price, but according to Sheth et al. (1991) on Muthaly & Roostika (2010:2) customer value dimensions on higher education only influenced by the three-dimensional functional also influenced by the emotional value and social value. Meanwhile, according to LeBlanc & Nguyen (1999) in Muthaly & Roostika (2010:2) when researching customer

value to students, it turns out the customer value is not only influenced by the functional value is also influenced by the symbol (symbol), pleasure (enjoyment) as well as social aspects.

Customer Value Dimensions in Higher Education:

Phadke and Bhagwat (2011) examined the value of customers in higher education to undergraduate students in the city of Bangalore, Karnataka India using a multidimensional approach. The dimensions were measured adapting customer value dimensions used by Ledden et al. (2007) as in the table on the concept of customer value in the above college.

Below are the dimensions used by Phadke and Bhagwat (2011) that has been adapted to the characteristics of the customer value in universities and a simplification of the

(3)

dimensions measured by Ledden et al. (2007) as follows:

Table 2 : Customer Value Dimensions

Ledden et al. (2007) Phadke and Bhagwat (2011)

Epistemic value

Learning Enjoyment Value Emotional value

Conditional value

Image Value Image Value

Functional value Functional Value

Monitery sacrifice

Money Non-Monitery sacrifice

Customer Satisfaction : Satisfaction is the consumer’s fulfillment response. It is a judgment that a product or service feature, or the product or service itself, provide a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment (Oliver in Zeithaml, Parasuraman and Berry, 2009). The statement shows that satisfaction is a response to consumer involvement in both goods and services consumed. Meanwhile, according to Zeithaml et al. (2009:104) satisfaction is the customer’s evaluation of product product or service in term of weather that product or service has met customer’s needs and expectations. From the statement it can be concluded that customer satisfaction is the customer's evaluation of the expectations and perceptions. According to Zeithaml et al. (2009:120) customer satisfaction can be divided into two: the first customer satisfaction on every interaction with the provider or any Moment of truth or the service encounter and the second from the accumulation of each Moment of truth or the service encounter. From this can be interpreted that customer satisfaction can be felt well in every process of interaction and after consuming a goods or services. Meanwhile Moment of truth or the service encounter itself according to Zeithaml et al. (2009:122) is the impression received by the customer when interacting with providers (firm) can be via remote encounter, phone or face to face. Customer Satisfaction is the best “scorecard” for measuring

delivered Customer Value (Wahyuningsih, 2005).

According to Ranaweera & Prabhu, (2003 in Muthaly & Roostika, 2010), Customers who are satisfied tend to show positive behavioral outcomes and ultimately the financial benefits derived from satisfied customers. From the second statement that the satisfaction is very important to measure the performance of customer value and customer satisfaction due to the success of the company providing the customer value affect customer behavior positively to the company.

Roberts and Styron (2010) to measure student satisfaction in one of the Universities in the southern region of the United States by using dimensions like academic advising, social connectedness, involvement and engagement, faculty and staff approachability, business procedures, learning experiences, and student support services. In this study the researchers used dimensions of customer satisfaction in higher education used by Roberts and Styron (2010) because it is more relevant to this research topic.

Customer Advocacy Behavior: The concept of customer advocacy behaviors deeper than the concept of customer loyalty in managing the company's relationships with customers. Because in addition to making a purchase again and recommend to others, the behavior will be an advocate of corporate product. According to Urban (2005:15) benefit from customer advocacy behaviors can be seen from 4 (four) areas as follows: Reduced Customer Acquisitions Costs

Customer Advocacy can reduce customer acquisition costs in two ways: first, by advocating reaching and increasing customer confidence in the company, products, and brands that will have the advantage of word-of-mouth madeby the customer. Second, the company will not constantly spend money on getting new customers because the customers will become loyal advocates.

Higher Profit Margins: With consumer confidence

increases, the customer would be willing to pay a higher price if the company raises that would increase profit margins for the company.

Long-Term Competitive Advantage: Customer Advocacy

can be the foundation for maintaining a sustainable competitive advantage. Better relations with customer value will help companies to innovate. Customers will help to create new product success. Customer confidence will help to build the brand and when the environment changes, the customer will remain loyal to give credence to the company.

In implementing customer advocacy behaviors ultimately successful relationship marketing approach can be seen from the behavior of the customer after purchase. Customer behavior reflects the behavior of the advocate. According Bendapudi and Berry (1997) in Walz and Celuch (2010), Customer Advocacy behavior refers to the promotion or defense of a company, product or brand by customer to another. Walz and Celuch (2010) had measure customer advocacy behavior with 4 (four) indicators are:

 Say positive things about product/brand

 Defend when someone say something negative about

product/brand

 Encourage friends and relative

 Recommend

Some previous researchers have revealed a relationship between the value of customer satisfaction and customer behavior, especially behavior after purchase. Listed below are five models that have been summarized by Graf & Maas (2008:18) from the results of the researchers who conduct research on customer value and customer behavior after the purchase of goods or services.

(4)

3. OBJECTIVES

The purposes of this study are to assess the effect of the Customer Value and Customer Satisfaction to the Customer Advocacy Behavior. The study is expected to be a useful input for education providers in understanding the student’s behavior, so that they can help create value in accordance with the needs, wants and expectations of students and other this research is expected to be a new discovery for the benefit of science especially for marketing science.

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Based on literature review, this study conceptualizes the relationships among customer value (CV) and customer satisfaction (CS) on customer advocacy behaviour (CA) as shown in Figure 1. And the hypotheses of this study is as follows:

H1 : Customer value has a positive influence on

customer advocacy behaviors.

H2 : Customer satisfaction has a positive influence on customer advocacy behaviors.

H3 : Customer value and customer satisfaction has a

positive influence on customer advocacy

behaviors.

Respondents: Sampleswere collected from STPB’s final year students. It was taken from three departments namely, Tourism Department, Hospitality Department and Travel Department. Each department sampled using proportion at stratified random sampling technique. In the end, the technique reduces the number of samples for the Tourism Department is 30 students, Hospitality Department is 90 students and Travel Department is 30students.

The number of sample collection was 150 in total within one weeks from 4th to 9th June, 2012. According to Anderson and Gerbing (1988), to satisfy a structure equation modeling (SEM) analysis needs samples between 100 and 150. Therefore, the study meets this basic requirement.

Instrument: The questionnaire contains two parts: the first part is the approval rate and the second is the level of student’s satisfaction. For as much as the level of agreement contains 23 questions to measure the extent of customer value and student advocacy behavior. Meanwhile for the level of satisfaction contains seven questions to measure the level of student satisfaction level on the performance of the

services rendered by STPB. This study measures questionnaires by using 5-point Likert scale “1-very disagree/5-very agree”.

To determine the validity and reliability of these instruments, testing the validity of using Pearson's product moment correlation coefficient and the results of the instrument has good validity as the average in each question the validity coefficient > 0.361 (the critical point in this study). As for the reliability of the instrument is done using Cronbach Alpha and the results are quite reliable instruments to measure each of the variables in this study. Results showed Cronbach Alpha reliability for the X1 at 0.933; X2 of 0.863 and 0.751 for Y.

Fig. 1 : Research Model

Source: Modified from Phadke and Bhagwat (2011), Roberts and Styron (2010), Walz and Celuch (2010)

5. DATA ANALYSIS

Data analysis techniques used in this research is Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). The assumptions to apply this techniques including absence of multicollinearity, outliers, as well as the presence of homogeneity, linearity, and normality have been met.

Before analyzing the data, Table 3 lists means and standard deviations of three constructs and correlations among the 15 manifest.

Table 3 : Mean, Standard Deviation, and Correlation Metrices Mani

fest

Mea n

Std. D

V IV FV MO AA SC IE FS BP LE

X SS SPT DE EF

LEV 27.3

748 5.39

323

IV 18.2

411 3.66

425 .780

FV 12.9

751 3.05

424 .642

** .624

(5)

71 496 ** ** **

AA 3.09

14 .912 45 .507 ** .510 ** .406 ** .451 **

SC 2.89

75 .933 79 .509 ** .507 ** .500 ** .418 ** .484 **

IE 3.31

33 .921 22 .402 ** .346 ** .387 ** .327 ** .378 ** .580 **

FS 3.79

97 .928 01 .378 ** .361 ** .436 ** .391 ** .359 ** .504 ** .428 **

BP 3.79

97 .914 14 .332 ** .342 ** .452 ** .321 ** .357 ** .371 ** .402 ** .501 **

LEX 3.56

62 .928 47 .493 ** .459 ** .417 ** .411 ** .294 ** .419 ** .353 ** .463 ** .347 **

SS 2.98

54 .938 80 .523 ** .509 ** .464 ** .403 ** .485 ** .431 ** .285 ** .389 ** .396 ** .378 **

SPT 3.31

33 .937 34 .575 ** .547 ** .470 ** .418 ** .404 ** .400 ** .232 ** .309 ** .253 ** .448 ** .522 **

DE 3.79

97 .920 15 .504 ** .531 ** .466 ** .406 ** .359 ** .403 ** .272 ** .323 ** .297 ** .379 ** .398 ** .546 **

EF 3.22

70 .933 39 .484 ** .446 ** .451 ** .391 ** .293 ** .351 ** .340 ** .366 ** .292 ** .412 ** .268 ** .484 ** .525 **

RE 3.79

97 .935 05 .452 ** .467 ** .437 ** .479 ** .292 ** .441 ** .417 ** .329 ** .331 ** .442 ** .299 ** .533 ** .569 ** .684 **

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level

Measurement Model: The purpose of measurement model is to build the relationship between measurement indices and latent variables by using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test model validity, and it also considers measuring errors. Therefore, this study will calculate individual variance rate (R2), which acts as an indicator to

evaluate whether measurement variables are consistent to the latent variable (Bollen, 1989). All the factor loadings were between 0.58 and 0.83, which is greater than the suggested value 0.50 (Hair, Anderson, Tatham & Black, 1998), so the results showed a consistency to the latent variable.

Table 3 : Construct Validity

Research Construct Indicators

(Variable Manifest) Loading Factors

Customer Value

X1.1 : Learning enjoyment value 0,836

X1.2 : Image value 0,810

X1.3 : Functional value (want satisfaction) 0,772

X1.4 : Money 0,645

Customer Satisfaction

X2.1 : Academic advising 0,638

X2.2 : Social connectedness 0,741

X2.3 : Involvement and engagement 0,615

X2.4 : Faculty and staff approachability 0,651

X2.5 : Business procedures 0,580

X2.6 : Learning experiences 0,616

X2.7 : Student support services 0,642

Customer Advocacy Behavior

Y1 : Say positive things 0,716

Y2 : Defend when someone say something negative 0,734

Y3 : Encourage friends and relative 0,753

(6)

To verify whether a measurement model has a goodness of fit, one can judge its value of construct reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (VE). Wijanto (2008) suggested that if CR is higher than 0.7, it means that the measurement model has a goodness of fit. All of CR in this study is all above 0.83 that shows goodness of fit in the measurement model. On the other hand, average variance extracted of the latent variables can explain the ratio of indices variance, the higher of VE value, the better of convergent validity and discriminant validity to the model. Wijanto (2008) suggested that a good VE value has to be same or greater than 0.50. Most of VE values are higher than 0.50 except 0.41 on Customer Satisfaction, Therefore the model has a quite reliability.

Table 4 : Construct Reliability

Research Construct CR VE Reliability

Customer Value 0,852 0.592 Reliable

Customer Satisfaction 0,830 0.412 Quite

reliable Customer Advocacy

Behavior 0,837 0.562 Reliable

Structural Model : Structural model is to test whether the built up theoretical relationship is supported by data. Hair, et al. (1998) categorized overall model fit into three indices: absolute fit measures, incremental fit measures, and parsimonious fit measures. After comparing all fit indices with their corresponding recommended values (see Table 3), the results showed the model has a goodness of fit.

Table 5 : Fit Indices for Structural Model

Fit Indices Criteria Result

Root mean square error of

approximation (RMSEA) <0,08 0.067

Goodness of fit index (GFI) >0,9 0.88

Normed fit index (NFI) >0,9 0.96

Comparative fit index (CFI) >0,9 0.98

Non-normed fit index (NNFI) >0,9 0.98

Incremental fit index (IFI) >0,9 0.98

Relative fit index (RFI) >0,9 0.95

Standardized root mean square residual

(SRMR) <0,05 0.05

6. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Structural models to test hypotheses based on the estimated value of the variable influence between customer value and customer satisfaction can be seen in Figure 2 below.

Fig. 2 : Structural Model

Toassess the influence of endogenous variables to exogenous variables can be explained by coefficient of determination (R2) was calculated as follows.

CA = 0.68*CV + 0.15*CS, Errorvar.= 0.35 , R² = 0.65

From the structural model above, it can be interpreted that the effect of customer value and customer satisfaction in student advocacy behavior is 65%, while the remaining 35% is explained by other variables. It is clear that the advocacy behavior is not only influenced by customer value and customer satisfaction but there are other variables not examined in this study or it can be said that the behavior of student advocacy is not only influenced by customer value and customer satisfaction, but there are other variables that also affect it.

While the structural model for T-Value between variables of customer value and customer satisfaction with student advocacy behavior can be seen in Figure 3 below.

Fig. 3 : T-Value Model

7. HIPOTHESES TESTING

H1 : Customer value has a positive influence on customer advocacy behaviors : Estimation parameter for testing the effect of customer value on customer advocacy behavioral show the estimated value of 0.68 and t-value of 3.43. Therefore both values indicated that H1 eligible to be accepted because the estimate parameter is positive (0.68) and the t-value at 3.43 is greater than 1.96 so that the dimensions of customer value has a positive effect on the customer advocacy behavior.

H2 : Customer satisfaction has a positive influence on customer advocacy behaviors : Estimation parameter for testing the effect of customer satisfaction on customer advocacy behavior shows the estimated value of 0.15 and t-value of 0.78. Therefore both t-values indicates that the H2 does not qualify to be accepted because although the price parameter estimate is positive (0.15 ) but the t-value of 0.78 is less than 1.96 its mean that the dimensions of customer satisfaction has a positive effect on customer behavior but not significant enough.

H3 : Customer value and customer satisfaction has a positive influence on customer advocacy behaviors :

(7)

Value of determination keofisien (R2) is 65% with an error rate of 35% indicates that 65% of the variation in student advocacy behavior is explained by the variation on customer value and customer satisfaction. While 35% of the variation in student advocacy behavior is explained by variation in other variables that are not included in this study. It can be concluded that the H3 is received or there is a positive effect between the combination of customer value and satisfaction of customer advocacy behavior

8. CONCLUSION

The study found that customer value had a strong influence on the customer advocacy behavior; however, customer satisfaction has a weak influence on the customer advocacy behavior. The results indicate that customer value is a crucial role in higher education. It maybe because the customers search more than satisfaction, they search for delightful on the services given by higher education. It suggests that higher customer advocacy behavior arise when higher education delivers superior customer value and maintenance the customer’s delight.

Research implications for higher education’s management are: human resources quality development, completing of educational facilities, cooperation with World Class University in tourism and deliver superior customer value to make delightful students.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Recomendation for future researchers is for developing customer satisfaction as an intervening variable between customer value and customer advocacy behavior with longitudinal studies approach.

10.REFERENCES

[1] Alves, Helena. 2010. The Measurement of Perceived Value in Higher Education: a Unidimensional Approach. Working Paper. Department of Business and Economics University of Beira Interior. Portugal

[2] Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.

[3] Anwar, Saleha and Amir Gulzar. 2011. Impact of Perceived Value on Word Of Mouth Endorsement and Customer Satisfaction: Mediating Role of Repurchase Intentions. International Journal of Economics and Management Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 5, 2011, pg. 46-54.

[4] Blackston, M. 1992. A Brand with an Attitude: A Suitable Case for the Treatment. Journal of the Market Research Society. Vol.34, No.3, pp. 231–241.

[5] Cravens, D.W and Nigel F. Piercy. 2009. Strategic Marketing 9th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

[6] Diab, Balqis. 2009. Analisis Pengaruh Nilai Pelanggan Dan Citra Merek Terhadap Kepuasan Pelanggan Dalam Meningkatkan Retensi Pelanggan (Studi Kasus Pada Gies Batik Pekalongan. Tesis yang tidak dipublikasikan. Universitas Diponegoro. Semarang.

[7] Duchessi, Peter. 2002. Crafting Customer Value: The Art and Science. United States of America. Purdue University.

[8] Ferdinand, Augusty. 2006. Metode Penelitian Manajemen: Pedoman Penelitian untuk Penulisan Skripsi, Tesis, dan Disertasi Ilmu Manajemen. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

[9] Graf, Albert and Peter Maas. 2008. Customer Value froma Customer Perspective: A Comprehensive Review. Working Papers on Risk Management and Insurance No. 52.

[10]Griffin, Jill. 2005. Customer Loyalty: Menumbuhkan dan Mempertahankan Kesetiaan Pelanggan. Alihbahasa: Dwi Kartini Yahya dan kawankawan. Jakarta: Erlangga.

[11]Hair et al. 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis, Fifth Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

[12]Hayes, Bob E. 2008. The True Test of Loyalty. Quality Progress Magazine, Vol. 6, No. 41, pg. 20.

[13]Hooper, et al. 2008. Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. Article. Journal of Business Research Methods, pg. 6(1), 53-60.

[14]Kartajaya, Hermawan. 2003. Marketing in Venus. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

[15]Kartajaya, Hermawan. 2005. Memenangkan Persaingan Dengan Segitiga Positioning-Diferensiasi-Brand. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

[16]Kotler, P. and Kevin Lane Keller. 2012. Marketing Management 14th Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. [17]Lawer, Christopher and Simon Knox. Customer advocacy

and brand development. Journal of Product& Brand Management, Vol. 15, No. 2, pg. 121–129.

[18]Oliver, Richard l, 1996. Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perpective On The Consumer, The McGraw-Hill Companise, Inc: New York.

[19]Oliver, L., et al. 1997. Customer Delight: Foundations, Findings, and Managerial Insight. Journal of Retailing, pg. 73 (3): 311–336.

[20]Parasuraman, A. 1997. Reflections on gaining competitive advantage through customer value. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science. Spring 1997; 25, 2; ABI/INFORM Complete, pg. 154.

[21]Phadke, Suniti K. and Venkatesh Bhagwat. 2011. Insight into Undergraduate Business Students’ Perception of Education Service Quality and Value. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies.Vol.1, Issue 3, 2011, pg. 1-18.

[22]Raharso, S. 2005. Pengaruh Customer Delight terhadap Behavior-Intention Battery. Jurnal Wirausaha, pg. 34(5):45– 53.

[23]Roberts, Jalynn and Ronald Styron, Jr. 2010. Student satisfaction and persistence: factors vital to student Retention. Research in Higher Education Journal, pg. 1-18.

[24]Roostika, Ratnaand Siva Muthaly. 2010. A Formative Approach to Customer Value in the Indonesian Higher Education Sector. Working Paper. Swinburne University of Technology.

[25]Schiffman, Leon G. & Kanuk, Leslie L. 2007. Consumer Behaviour 9th Edition. New Jersey: Printice Hall.

[26]Singh, Harkiranpal. 2006. The Importance of Customer Satisfaction in Relation to Customer Loyalty and Retention. Working Paper. Asia Pacific University College of Technology & Innovation Technology Park Malaysia. [27] Smith, Shaun and Joe Wheeler. 2005. Managing Customer

Experience. New Jersey: Printice Hall.

[28]Spiteria, Joseph M. and Paul A. Dionb. 2004. Customer value, overall satisfaction, end-user loyalty, and market performance in detail intensive industries. Journal of Industrial Marketing Management, 33, pg. 675–687.

(8)

Alfabeta.

[30]Tjiptono, Fandy. 1997. Strategy Pemasaran, Edisi Kedua, Cetakan Pertama. Yogyakarta: Andi offset.

[31]Tjiptono, Fandy. 2008. Strategi Pemasaran. Yogyakarta: Andi Offset.

[32]Urban, Glen. 2005. Don’t Just Relate-Advocate. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

[33]Urban, Glen L. 2004. The Emerging Era of Customer Advocacy. Mit Sloan Management Review, Vol.45, No.2. [34]Wahyuningsih. 2005. The Relationship among Customer

Value, Satisfaction and Behavioral Intentions: A General Structural Equation Model. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, Vol. 7, No. 3, pg. 301-323.

[35]Walz, Anna M. and Celuch, Kevin G. 2010. The Effect of Retailer Communication on Customer Advocacy: The Moderating Role. Journal Of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction And Complaining Behavior; Vo. 23, Pg. 95. [36]Wijanto, Setyo Hari. 2008. Structural Equation Modeling

dengan LISREL 8.8: Konsep dan Tutorial. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu

[37]Woodruff, Robert B. 1997. Customer value: The next source for competitive advantage Academy of Marketing Science. Journal; spring 1997; 25, 2; ABI/INFORM Complete, pg. 139.

[38]Woodside, Arch G. 2008. Advances In Business Marketing And Purchasing, First Edition.UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

(1)

Nurdin Hidayah, Diana Sari and Arief Helmi VSRDIJBMR, Vol. III (VIII), August 2013 / 305

dimensions measured by Ledden et al. (2007) as follows: Table 2 : Customer Value Dimensions

Ledden et al. (2007) Phadke and Bhagwat (2011) Epistemic value

Learning Enjoyment Value Emotional value

Conditional value

Image Value Image Value

Functional value Functional Value Monitery sacrifice

Money Non-Monitery sacrifice

Higher Profit Margins: With consumer confidence increases, the customer would be willing to pay a higher price if the company raises that would increase profit margins for the company.

Growth: Customer Advocacy can also increase the size of the purchase of products by customers, because the customers already believe they will buy more and buy the other product categories of the company (retention). Long-Term Competitive Advantage: Customer Advocacy can be the foundation for maintaining a sustainable competitive advantage. Better relations with customer value will help companies to innovate. Customers will help to create new product success. Customer confidence will help to build the brand and when the environment changes, the customer will remain loyal to give credence to the company.

 Say positive things about product/brand

 Defend when someone say something negative about product/brand

 Encourage friends and relative  Recommend

(2)

3. OBJECTIVES

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

H1 : Customer value has a positive influence on customer advocacy behaviors.

H2 : Customer satisfaction has a positive influence on customer advocacy behaviors.

H3 : Customer value and customer satisfaction has a positive influence on customer advocacy behaviors.

services rendered by STPB. This study measures questionnaires by using 5-point Likert scale “1-very disagree/5-very agree”.

Fig. 1 : Research Model

Source: Modified from Phadke and Bhagwat (2011), Roberts and Styron (2010), Walz and Celuch (2010)

5. DATA ANALYSIS

Before analyzing the data, Table 3 lists means and standard deviations of three constructs and correlations among the 15 manifest.

Table 3 : Mean, Standard Deviation, and Correlation Metrices Mani

fest

Mea n

Std. D

V IV FV MO AA SC IE FS BP

X SS SPT DE EF

LEV 27.3

748 5.39

323

IV 18.2

411 3.66

425 .780

FV 12.9

751 3.05

424 .642

** .624

(3)

Nurdin Hidayah, Diana Sari and Arief Helmi VSRDIJBMR, Vol. III (VIII), August 2013 / 307

71 496 ** ** **

AA 3.09

14 .912 45 .507 ** .510 ** .406 ** .451 **

SC 2.89

75 .933 79 .509 ** .507 ** .500 ** .418 ** .484 **

IE 3.31

33 .921 22 .402 ** .346 ** .387 ** .327 ** .378 ** .580 **

FS 3.79

97 .928 01 .378 ** .361 ** .436 ** .391 ** .359 ** .504 ** .428 **

BP 3.79

97 .914 14 .332 ** .342 ** .452 ** .321 ** .357 ** .371 ** .402 ** .501 **

LEX 3.56

62 .928 47 .493 ** .459 ** .417 ** .411 ** .294 ** .419 ** .353 ** .463 ** .347 **

SS 2.98

54 .938 80 .523 ** .509 ** .464 ** .403 ** .485 ** .431 ** .285 ** .389 ** .396 ** .378 **

SPT 3.31

33 .937 34 .575 ** .547 ** .470 ** .418 ** .404 ** .400 ** .232 ** .309 ** .253 ** .448 ** .522 **

DE 3.79

97 .920 15 .504 ** .531 ** .466 ** .406 ** .359 ** .403 ** .272 ** .323 ** .297 ** .379 ** .398 ** .546 **

EF 3.22

70 .933 39 .484 ** .446 ** .451 ** .391 ** .293 ** .351 ** .340 ** .366 ** .292 ** .412 ** .268 ** .484 ** .525 **

RE 3.79

97 .935 05 .452 ** .467 ** .437 ** .479 ** .292 ** .441 ** .417 ** .329 ** .331 ** .442 ** .299 ** .533 ** .569 ** .684 ** ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level

Table 3 : Construct Validity

Research Construct Indicators

(Variable Manifest) Loading Factors

Customer Value

X1.1 : Learning enjoyment value 0,836

X1.2 : Image value 0,810

X1.3 : Functional value (want satisfaction) 0,772

X1.4 : Money 0,645

Customer Satisfaction

X2.1 : Academic advising 0,638

X2.2 : Social connectedness 0,741

X2.3 : Involvement and engagement 0,615

X2.4 : Faculty and staff approachability 0,651

X2.5 : Business procedures 0,580

X2.6 : Learning experiences 0,616

X2.7 : Student support services 0,642

Customer Advocacy Behavior

Y1 : Say positive things 0,716

Y2 : Defend when someone say something negative 0,734

Y3 : Encourage friends and relative 0,753

(4)

Table 4 : Construct Reliability

Research Construct CR VE Reliability Customer Value 0,852 0.592 Reliable Customer Satisfaction 0,830 0.412 Quite

reliable Customer Advocacy

Behavior 0,837 0.562 Reliable

Table 5 : Fit Indices for Structural Model

Fit Indices Criteria Result

Root mean square error of

approximation (RMSEA) <0,08 0.067 Goodness of fit index (GFI) >0,9 0.88

Normed fit index (NFI) >0,9 0.96 Comparative fit index (CFI) >0,9 0.98 Non-normed fit index (NNFI) >0,9 0.98 Incremental fit index (IFI) >0,9 0.98 Relative fit index (RFI) >0,9 0.95 Standardized root mean square residual

(SRMR) <0,05 0.05

6. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Structural models to test hypotheses based on the estimated value of the variable influence between customer value and customer satisfaction can be seen in Figure 2 below.

Fig. 2 : Structural Model

Toassess the influence of endogenous variables to exogenous variables can be explained by coefficient of determination (R2) was calculated as follows.

CA = 0.68*CV + 0.15*CS, Errorvar.= 0.35 , R² = 0.65

While the structural model for T-Value between variables of customer value and customer satisfaction with student advocacy behavior can be seen in Figure 3 below.

Fig. 3 : T-Value Model

7. HIPOTHESES TESTING

H3 : Customer value and customer satisfaction has a positive influence on customer advocacy behaviors :

(5)

Nurdin Hidayah, Diana Sari and Arief Helmi VSRDIJBMR, Vol. III (VIII), August 2013 / 309

8. CONCLUSION

9. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT